PSYOPS generally delivers its ‘munitions’ in the form of information and ideas, aimed at attacking loyalties, hatreds, fears and misconceptions. PSYOPS aims to break down cohesion by undermining the moral and intellectual links between hostile leaders and their followers, leaving them unwilling to respond or fight effectively. Creating the perception in the adversary’s mind that the achievement of his end state is impossible, and attempts to do so will be costly, is fundamentally a psychological activity aimed at creating the perception of his own defeat; In this way PSYOPS, allied to credible force, may even render conflict unnecessary. Dissemination of PSYOPS messages through the written or spoken word,symbology and other visual imagery can all be used singly or in combination, in leaflets, printed articles, radio and TV broadcasts, face to face engagement, the Internet, text messaging and loudspeakers.

15 Psycological Warfare group in Chicksands Bedfordshire

15 psyops annual report wrote:

The purpose of PSYOPS is to influence the perceptions,attitudes and behaviour of individuals or groups of people (the Target Audience) causing them to act in a manner that supports the achievement of the Commander’s end-state. This may take weeks, months or even years to implement and achieve. The crucial difference between PSYOPS and most other military activities is that the resultant behaviour of the Target Audience is ultimately consensual. Thus, PSYOPS has the potential to produce enduring results, particularly in the area of conflict prevention and resolution. Whilst coercion is definitely a psychological activity that may lead to short -term effect, once the coercion is removed protagonists might revert to their previous behaviour pattern. By contrast, successful PSYOPS is more subtle and leads to a change in perception, attitude or behaviour. When employed wisely, PSYOPS can lower enemy morale by creating doubts, dissidence and disaffection within its ranks or can provide the means to understand, communicate with and influence the Target Audience. Specifically targeted, PSYOPS can weaken the will of the enemy, reinforce the support of the loyal and gain the support of the uncommitted.

Strategic Communication Laboratories describes itself as "the leading supplier of Information Operations, Strategic Communication and Public Diplomacy services to governments and military clients worldwide."
At the centre of SCL's activities are what it refers to as construction and training of people to run an "Opcentre."
"A strategic communication centre puts influence, control and power back into the hands of the government and military. It is an essential component for Homeland Security, Conflict Reduction, International Public Diplomacy and un-mediated Government communications. Over the last 15 years the military use of Psyop has saved thousands of lives on both sides of military conflicts. In the future, conflicts may well be resolved on the global media stage, so that direct action becomes an unnecessary tactic," it states on its website.
"Governments and Military forces worldwide are realising that communication can be a very powerful force. Those countries without the ability to control and respond to communications in a strategic capacity will be at a serious disadvantage in political and military terms," it states.
"SCL is providing governments and military forces all over the world with the power to control their own communication messages and manage perceptions on the world media stage. Furthermore, it gives governments greater access to their own publics in time of crises and the military greater power to influence enemy disengagement in time of conflict," it states.

SCL Comes Out At An Arms Fair
SCL made its public debut in September 2005 with a glitzy exhibit occupying prime real estate at Defense Systems & Equipment International 2005, or DSEI, the United Kingdom's largest showcase for military technology. The main attraction was a full-scale mock-up of its ops center, running simulations ranging from natural disasters to political coups," Sharon Weinberger writes for Slate. [1]
The elaborate booth included actors, flashing computer screens and a "a dark-suited man with a wireless microphone [pacing] like a carnival barker, narrating the scenarios." One of which features a "sophisticated campaign of mass deception" that uses a fictitious chemical plant accident as a ploy to minimize the spread of smallpox."If your definition of propaganda is framing communications to do something that's going to save lives, that's fine," says Mark Broughton, SCL's public affairs director. "That's not a word I would use for that." [2]

Clients
SCL doesn't disclose the name of its past or present clients but boasts that it has worked on communication "campaigns for 27 governments and sovereigns worldwide - including personally advising eleven prime ministers and presidents - as well as NGOs, police departments, military forces and political parties, a major US city, and work for the UN. Projects include election campaigns and analysis (including the largest political research project ever undertaken in the world - a 500-strong team working for over a year on a budget of Â£20m), together with political lobbying and democratic reform." [3]

Several prorjects it has understaken include:
"Design and develop a permanent military strategic communication facility capable of delivering strategic and operational psyop campaigns for a South Asian country;"
"Design, build and install a Homeland Security Centre for an Asian country. The Opcentre can override all national radio and TV broadcasts in time of crisis;" and
"Recruitment, training and equipping an operational and tactical Psyop and Civil Affairs military unit for a British Commonwealth country." [4]

SOCIAL MEDIA FOR DEFENSE - MAY 2012 Washington DChttp://www.idgasocialmedia.com/Event.aspx?id=659400
Welcome to Social Media for Defense
IDGA’s 5th Annual Social Media for Defense provides a forum for senior level Government and Military officials, industry partners, and the academic communities to align shared goals, showcase new technology, and define the way forward.

DARPA, the Pentagon’s advanced concepts think-tank, is looking to take propaganda to the next level, and they’re hoping to do so by controlling the very way their targets perceive and interpret the flow of incoming information.

The Pentagon believes that by engaging in ‘narrative control’ they can alter an individual’s grasp on reality and the way in which they evaluate current events. Simply put, DARPA is looking to shape minds with stories.

Now, this isn’t an entirely new concept. The notion of narrative control, or narrative networks, has been bunted around for a few years now.

It’s been said that history books are written by the victors. Well, these days hopeful victors are trying to write current events. State actors are increasingly disclosing information in a way that constructs a kind of story. It’s through the careful construction of desirable narratives that state actors are hoping to control the beliefs and actions of targeted audiences. It’s a classic case of the pen being mightier than the sword—but in this case it’s a pen that digs deep into the very psyche of the individual.

The United States has been engaging in narrative control for quite some time now. Most recently, during the Arab Spring, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weaved a tale that suggested a certain level of inevitability to the events unfolding in the Middle East. One by one, she contended, authoritarian and fundamentalist nations were being overthrown by angry and forward-looking populaces. It’ll only be a matter of time, Clinton argued, before the entire Middle East goes through a transformation that sees all its countries embrace democracy, secular institutions, and unprecedented freedoms.

Now I’m not suggesting that this isn’t a valid interpretation of events. It very well may be. But what’s important to understand here is that the U.S. is presenting this narrative in a very overt and calculated way. For many of those in the Middle East, the story is most certainly compelling and potentially inspiring. And for those sitting on the fence or considering radical action, this story of apparent inevitability may compel them to join the “winning team.” It’s through this kind of narrative control and reality building that the U.S. hopes to fight terrorism and the spread of radical Islam.

But now DARPA wants to take this further and make it more scientific and systematic. They recently put out a request for research proposals in the areas of:
Quantitative analysis of narratives
Understanding the effects narratives have on human psychology and its affiliated neurobiology
Modeling, simulating, and sensing-especially in stand-off modalities-these narrative influences

DARPA would like to revolutionize the study of narrative influence by “advancing narrative analysis and neuroscience so as to create new narrative influence sensors, doubling status quo capacity to forecast narrative influence.”

This is pretty heavy stuff. They’re asking scientists to “take narratives and make them quantitatively analyzable in a rigorous, transparent and repeatable fashion.” Once such a system is put into place, the Pentagon will be able to detect terrorists or other non-state actors who have been indoctrinated with a particular ideology or worldview, and then respond with a counter-message of its own. As Dawn Lim notes in Wired, “They can also target groups vulnerable to terrorists’ recruiting tactics with their own counter-messaging.”

Lim describes how the project will unfold:

In the first 18-month phase of the program, the Pentagon wants researchers to study how stories infiltrate social networks and alter our brain circuits. One of the stipulated research goals: to “explore the function narratives serve in the process of political radicalization and how they can influence a person or group’s choice of means (such as indiscriminate violence) to achieve political ends.”

Once scientists have perfected the science of how stories affect our neurochemistry, they will develop tools to “detect narrative influence.” These tools will enable “prevention of negative behavioral outcomes … and generation of positive behavioral outcomes, such as building trust.” In other words, the tools will be used to detect who’s been controlled by subversive ideologies, better allowing the military to drown out that message and win people onto their side.

“The government is already trying to control the message, so why not have the science to do it in a systematic way?” said the researcher familiar with the project.

When the project enters into a second 18-month phase, it’ll use the research gathered to build “optimized prototype technologies in the form of documents, software, hardware and devices.” What will these be? Existing technology can carry out micro-facial feature analysis, and measure the dilation of blood vessels and eye pupils. MRI machines can determine which parts of your brain is lighting up when it responds to stories. Darpa wants to do even better.

DARPA is even calling for devices that detect the influence of stories in unseen ways: “Efforts that rely solely on standoff/non-invasive/non-detectable sensors are highly encouraged.”

“Stories are important in security contexts,” DARPA argues, “[stories] change the course of insurgencies, frame negotiations, play a role in political radicalization, influence the methods and goals of violent social movements.” Indeed, they’ve been thinking a lot about this recently, as indicated by their April workshop to discuss the neurobiology of narratives.

When it comes to security, little consideration is given to ethics. Now, while I’m somewhat partial to this approach on account of its bloodlessness, I have to admit that the potential for abuse is astonishing. Once these narrative networks reach full maturity they could be used to indoctrinate not just enemy populations, but more familiar ones as well. The very ways in which domestic affairs are perceived could be colored by a security department hoping to create a docile and abiding population.

That said, the efficacy of narrative networks has yet to be determined. The Internet and other communications networks may serve as a kind of prophylactic against narrow bands of information. Moreover, populations may become primed against such efforts in the same way current societies are (relatively) immune to traditional and obvious methods of propaganda.

As a final word, this topic interests me greatly as it relates to memetics, memetic engineering, and the whole concept of cultural health. In this context, the struggle against religious fundamentalism is a struggle against the onset and dissemination of bad memes. Fundamentalist memeplexes can be interpreted as information viruses that are running amok in the human population. Perhaps it’s not too outrageous to suggest that we should counter bad ideas with good ideas—or at least better ideas that lead to more rational thinking, criticality and independent thought.

Hollywood Unmasked Talk About Eye Opening..Kids ask your parent to screen before watching this. Due to the fact that this is an expose it shows some very wicked stuff that has been feed to the masses for years on screen. PARENTAL GUIDANCE IS SUGGESTED!!!

The dire dumbing down - the slow and tortuous sinking of Newsnight the BBC's flagship political programme.
After four months I have yet to see a single one of Allegra's reports which has thrown any light whatever on any political story.
She sits there with her mouth opening and closing making quite a good effort to appear like she knows what she is talking about but she doesn't appear to have a single original thought in her head.
She has turned the role of being a political correspondant into that of an actor playing at being a political correspondant who even makes Nick Robinson look on the ball.
Gone are the days it seems of Michael Crick or even David Grossman.
Allegra Stratton could not edit a book of garden flowers let alone the most important and publicly funded political programme in the country.
She embodies all that is wrong with the Birt style BBC culture of blandness as the slow-death of democracy in Britain continues relentlessly year after year and month after month.
I bet the politicians who watch have noticed she's rubbish - but has the BBC.
I once had the privilege to meet Sian Kevill who was a pretty sharp editor of Newsnight in the 1990s. I'm sure she would privately agree that with Allegra Stratton her show has been dragged down to an all time low.

Michael Crick left Newsnight after being ‘very unhappy’ about new ‘ill-defined’ role

Posted by Dominic Ponsford on 19 September 2011 at 07:58
http://blogs.pressgazette.co.uk/wire/8197
Former Newsnight political editor Michael Crick has revealed that he jumped ship from the BBC after 21 years because he faced being moved into an “ill-defined” role.
And he has also condemned his former employer for a “scandal” whereby hours of unbroadcast news footage - including interviews with politicians - are being deleted every week.
Crick told The Independent: “I was 19 years on Newsnight and 18 of them were extremely happy and then towards the end, about a year ago, they made it clear to me that they wanted me to stop being the political editor and to do another job, which was ill-defined. They sort of said it would involve politics but they wanted to bring in somebody else as political editor and I wasn’t very happy with that, to put it mildly.”
Crick said that after “years and years of cuts” the BBC is facing another five or six years of 20 per cent cuts brought on by the new financial settlement with the Government. He said that life has become “very, very difficult” because of efforts to “squeeze more and more out of the staff” on Newsnight.
Crick has also spoken about the “scandal” whereby the BBC does not archive unbroadcast footage in news and current affairs.
“Anybody making a documentary is going to get a lot more material out of the ITN archive than the BBC one.”
After being political editor of Newsnight, Crick is taking more junior position at Channel 4 News as number two to C4 news political editor Gary Gibbon.
Crick is the latest in a series of BBC journalism stars to leave for ITN. Former BBC Washington correspondent Matt Frei has just joined Channel 4 News in the same role, and as one of the regular anchors.

WAR - New Political Editor - BBC 2 Newsnight..
So last night on Newsnight Jeremy Paxman introduced us to the new Political Editor of Newsnight.

It was sad to note the apparent Political Correctness of the appointment?
Do you think it likely that it was the ex-Political Editor of the Daily Mail?
You are right - NO CHANCE!!!
The post has gone to Allegra Stratton ex- Political Editor of the Guardian!!
And the BBC's political correctness goes on as her first assignment was a one to interview with the disgraced MP for Yeovil David Laws.
This is a man one senses the BBC would love to see back in government and will try and do their little bit to help rehabilitate him.
The BBC won't see any of this as they are and remain INSTITUTIONALLY BIASED despite constantly telling us they are reforming.
Daily evidence shows the BBC is not reforming and never will so long they are funded by the licence fee and soft loans from the EU.
http://bbcinstitutionalbias.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/167-war-new-politic al-editor-bbc-2.html

I wonder if that last point on this thread has ever been made on the BBC?

Anyway - just to re-emphasise that now ALL our mainstream media in the UK has been knobbled I got a promotional leaflet today trying to get me to sign up to something called This Week magazine. My radio show's namesake.
The cover of the magazine shows a cartoon of a highwayman holding up two rich men in a carriage with the headline.

The British state-run broadcaster BBC interrupts Russian FM’s speech on Western media's biased news coverage of Syria.
Mon Jul 2, 2012 2:13AM GMT
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/07/02/248919/bbc-interrupts-lavrov-s peech/
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s criticisms about the Western media's news coverage of the situation in Syria, led the British state-run broadcaster BBC to interrupt his speech by a weather forecast item.

Lavrov’s press conference at the Geneva meeting on Saturday June 30 provided another chance for the BBC to show its bias against the Syrian government.

Different Arabic and Western news channels were deployed in order to give the minute coverage of the meeting’s news and sidelines, but after UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and UK Foreign Minister William Hague when it was the turn of the Russian Foreign Minister to speak, the channels cut their live broadcast and showed other programs instead.

The reason of such an action by the news networks was that Lavrov attacked some Western media for being biased against the Syrian government, saying, “Some TV channels [such as] Euronews, CNN and BBC when they show phone pictures they say that we can confirm the identity of these pictures.”

The strong criticism was enough for the channels to interrupt Lavrov’s speech, with the BBC, which claims to provide transparent and accurate information, showing a weather forecast item.

Of course this is not the first time that the BBC’s reports on the current situation in Syria are not transparent. Earlier on May, the network was caught passing off an old photo from Iraq in 2003 for the massacre in the Syrian town of Houla.

In a report published hours after the massacre, Britain's state-funded news network used an old photo of dead Iraqi children taken by Marco Di Lauro in Al Mussayyib nine years ago, and presented it as a photo of victims of the recent massacre of civilians in the town of Houla located in western Syria.

Here's a helluva coincidence for you.....
BBC's new DG George Entwistle was appointed editor of Newsnight the day before the 9/11 attacks!

He became Editor of Newsnight in 2001, starting work in his new post the day before the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon and Twin Towers in the USA. During his editorship, the show won five RTS Awards, including Best News Programme; as well as picking up a Broadcast Award and a Bafta nomination for Best News Programme.

George's career has embraced a broad range of factual programme-making. In 1999, after 10 years in current affairs, he joined the science department as deputy editor of BBC One's popular science show Tomorrow's World where he remained for two years before returning to Newsnight as Deputy Editor. In 2004 he left Newsnight for BBC Arts to become executive editor of Topical Arts on BBC Two and BBC Four. There he launched The Culture Show for BBC Two and executive-produced arts films for BBC Four. He also spent several months as Chair of the Knowledge Building workgroup on Mark Thompson's Creative Future strategy review.

In late 2005, he was appointed Head and Commissioning Editor of TV Current Affairs and joined BBC Television's factual commissioning team.

With Peter Fincham, then Controller of BBC One, George returned Panorama to a weekday peak-time slot. He also commissioned a wide variety of current affairs documentary series for BBC Two, including The Conspiracy Files, Michael Cockerell's series Blair: The Inside Story, Tropic Of Capricorn with Simon Reeve, Adam Curtis's series The Trap, the Falklands War drama-doc Sea Of Fire, Peter Taylor's four-part Age Of Terror, and Norma Percy's multiple award-winning Iran And The West.

In April 2007, he became Acting Controller of BBC Four and led the channel during a period which saw the first runs of Mad Men and Flight Of The Conchords. George also commissioned the highly successful Golden Age Of Steam season whose standout shows – Julia Bradbury's Railway Walks series and Ian Hislop's documentary on the Beeching closures – remain among the most watched factual programmes in the channel's history.

Press TV banned - but still thriving online
Everyone in the British media knows English language Iranian service Press TV has been banned by Ofcom as part of the prelude to a major illegal NATO/Israeli attack on or even invasion of Iran.
The lies Press TV are alleged to have told about drone strikes pale into nothing when compared to those lies transmitted and printed by the UK MSM in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
The 'democratic' West is lining up an Islamic hate regime (check out the snide 'investigative journalism bureau' story justifying the censorship) much as Hitler lined up a Jewish hate regime ... and is it really for the same purpose?
Judaism has been utterly perverted by Netanyahu's Zionism so despised by orthodox jews, and Christianity perverted by heretic crusaders Bush and Blair.
So this is not just a war for oil and money most importantly for the extermination of interest free money and the Abrahamic faiths which share the Old Testament.

BTW
I still have no reply to my recent complaint to Ofcom proving Channel 4 news is lying to the Bristsh politicians and public as a prelude to war on Syria.
After al they are entirely an establishment fix. Their 'consumer panel' was picked by corporate headhunters Odgers.

Confidence trickster Jonathan Miller, Channel 4 News, in Damascus? (25Nov11)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tp0gZxy7OIk
First recording: number of shots 5, duration of burst 1.5 seconds; second recording: number of shots 7, duration of burst 2.2 seconds.
Timing of shots in no way correlate: For example time between first and second shots: first recording 0.3 seconds, second recording 0.7 seconds.

Files declassified in America have revealed covert public relations and lobbying activities of Israel in the U.S. The National Archive made the documents public following a Senate investigation. They suggest Israel has been trying to shape media coverage of issues it regards as important. You can download the files from the web-site of the Institute for Research on Middle Eastern policy. And we can cross to Washington now and talk to Grant F. Smith who is a director at that Institute.

An occasional
BRILLIANT
Bit of mainstream media!
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/hamsterwheel/_________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD-ekxKZ_1c
They're targeting Iran's banking sector and energy trade and are aimed at making it curb its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Political analyst Chris Bambery says the measure is simply an attack on freedom of speech.

British national Nicholas Mockford, 60, has been the victim of a suspected assassination in the Belgian city of Brussels after being shot dead on the street outside a restaurant after a meal with his wife.

The Exxon Mobil oil company executive was killed on October 14th, but the details around the case have remained very secretive until now, in accordance with Belgian investigative protocol.

Even nearly two weeks on the case remains shrouded in secrecy, although it has emerged that Mr Mockford, who is a father of three, was shot three times - including once while he lay on the ground.

Detectives are said to be working on the assumption that Mr Mockford was targeted by a professional killer, having at first thought he could have been the victim of a particularly violent car-jacking.

The couple were attacked while crossing the street outside the Da Marcello restaurant in Rue de Beyseghem, which is located in Neder-over-Heembeek, a suburb of Brussels.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: 'We can confirm the death of a British national in Brussels on October 14 and we are providing consular assistance.'
The scene of the crime: Da Marcello restaurant (Picture: Google)

Mr Mockford, who originally comes from Leicestershire, had worked for ExxonMobil for nearly 40 years and was head of marketing for interim technologies.

His work had taken him around the globe, however, working in Belgium and spending time in Singapore. His wife, Mary, who was with him when he died, is a Belgian national.

A spokesman for Exxon Mobil said: 'We are shocked by the tragic death of one of our employees.

'BANGOR, Maine — Citing a longstanding battle with upper management over journalistic practices at their Bangor TV stations, news co-anchors Cindy Michaels and Tony Consiglio announced their resignations at the end of Tuesday’s 6 p.m. newscast.

Michaels and Consiglio, who have a combined 12½ years’ service at WVII (Channel 7) and sister station WFVX (Channel 22), shocked staff members and viewers with their joint resignations Tuesday evening.

“I just wanted to know that I was doing the best job I could and was being honest and ethical as a journalist, and I thought there were times when I wasn’t able to do that,” said Consiglio, a northeastern Connecticut native who broke in with WVII as a sports reporter in April 2006....'_________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

“Last week, a media outlet owned by Rupert Murdoch (shown), a “stealth” Israeli citizen and powerful Likudist leader, ran a purposefully false news story. The story was run as part of a fraudulent manipulation of oil markets.”
—
By Gordon Duff and Press TV
—
“News agencies, Fox and the Newscorp/Murdoch group, CNN, the New York Times, even Washington “think tanks” and the endless bellicose outpourings from Washington, London, Berlin and, most of all, Tel Aviv, can all be traced to systematic manipulation of key markets, crude oil and fuels, rare earths and defense related minerals and even currency markets.”

Last week, the London Times, owned by Rupert Murdoch, a “stealth” Israeli citizen and powerful Likudist leader, ran a purposefully false news story. His “tale” involved the use by Israel of bases within Azerbaijan by drones to plan attacks on Iran.

Azerbaijan’s president quickly denied the report, pledged his solidarity with Iran and demanded a retraction. The Times had no source for the report. It was invented.

Sources tell us the story was run as part of a fraudulent manipulation of oil markets. Billions were made in hours.

When the “denial” was published, billions more were made through illegal “short selling.”

When government, the military, the financial market, media and world terrorism become part of the same “corporate society,” there is big money to be made.

Turn on your television, watch the news. The story is in front of you every day.

News agencies, Fox and the Newscorp/Murdoch group, CNN, the New York Times, even Washington “think tanks” and the endless bellicose outpourings from Washington, London, Berlin and, most of all, Tel Aviv, can all be traced to systematic manipulation of key markets, crude oil and fuels, rare earths and defense related minerals and even currency markets.

One day, an Israeli official will announce, as we saw with Defense Minister Ehud Barak back in August while interviewed by Mossad “news asset” Wolf Blitzer, that “Iran has no nuclear weapons program.”

Barak’s statement could have been based on intelligence reports that, consistently since 2007 and before, have indicated that Iran has no nuclear weapons program.

It could have been based on reports from those who run Israel’s own illicit nuke program, one the UN General Assembly recently voted to curtail, clear knowledge that a nation that actively builds illegal weapons of mass destruction knows when another nation is not.

No nation has more knowledge of deceit or spitting in the face of the international community as Israel does.

Barak’s game? Lessened war fears allowed the crash in “options” pricing to allow key allies of Israel, especially the Koch Brothers, to corner more of the future market.

Then, of course, a concerted effort soon followed, as though Barak had never existed, threats to bomb Iran, even orders to expand Pentagon exercises to create greater war threats in the region.

The basis?

More cash, as newspapers raised the orchestrated crescendo of war mongering, as key American legislators bellowed threats, as “think tanks” published bizarre and baseless allegations and, as usual, the “puppet” IAEA, International Atomic Energy Association, a front organization for Wall Street market manipulators, joined the chorus.

A year ago, their former spokesman and major source of “expertise” on nuclear weapons, former US Department of Energy Chief Nuclear Weapons Designer Clinton Bastin contacted David Albright.

Bastin, with over 40 years’ experience, “hands on,” with nukes, a Marine veteran of World War II, said of his close friend and former co-worker at the IAEA, Albright:

“David Albright, a physicist, former colleague, president of the non-government Institute for Science and International Security in Washington and a former consultant for IAEA inspectors, is recognized by the US news media as an expert on nuclear weapons but is not. I called David several months ago to correct inaccurate information attributed to him by New York Times reporter William J. Broad. I also mentioned that Pakistan probably did not have many nuclear weapons because gun-type weapons require about 100 pounds of highly enriched uranium. David said that he had seen drawings of Pakistan’s weapons and they had solid cores but were implosion, not gun-type. With that statement, I realized that David did not understand basic concepts of nuclear weapons.”

When stories hit the news that there had been large-scale manipulation of airline stocks that would have required advanced knowledge of 9/11, the media quickly called the story “conspiracy theory.”

The problem is that the stock manipulation scams tied to 9/11 were very real, carefully documented and involved billions of dollars.

Notwithstanding, the acquisition of the World Trade Center itself by Larry Silverstein, buildings reeking of dangerous asbestos, nearly empty, a massive financial liability that would have required billions in renovation or demolition suddenly became the “deal of the century” when 9/11 happened, within days of the entire facility being vastly over-insured against terror attacks.

If it were a few isolated incidents, it would be one thing. If it involved just a few individuals or organizations, it would be “one thing.”

The problem is that this has gone on for years. The problem is that the manipulation of intelligence leading to the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq can be tied to tens of thousands of transactions, all tied globally to government agencies, the majority of news organizations and, just “seemingly,” terrorist groups that may very well have always been, in actuality, arms of the CIA, Mossad, MI-6 and other such organization.

A careful analysis of investment patterns, oil, arms, shipping, minerals, pharmaceutical, defense and others, beginning with 2001, indicate a pattern of advanced knowledge and even manipulation of historical events.

A more serious problem is that the super-computers operated by the NSA and other agencies are tasked with seeking and recognizing such patterns.

In fact, we have solid information that the organizations tasked with monitoring ties between terrorism and market manipulation may actually have been used to plan the acts themselves.

This, of course, would represent an accusation that groups within the US government had invented the “Global War on Terror” in order to loot the world’s financial market, crash currencies, create a permanent ability to destabilize any sector at will and do so without any threat of retribution.

We have always seen wars chase resources, wars for oil, wars to control the drug markets, wars to distract attention from civil meltdown and imposition of police state provisions through incomprehensible “international” groups, cabals, gangs, known by one or a dozen names, best referred to as “organized crime.”

How we know that organized crime runs the world is that any person, any nation that speaks up, that stands against what is an obvious “wave of entropy,” is labeled a “terrorist madman.”

Today, we began by examining one false news story, Rupert Murdoch using what had, at one time, been a well-respected news organization as a front for a petty robbery.

Perhaps “petty” is the wrong word, as twenty billion dollars were bilked from Americans with only a few pages of fantasy, the “free press” at work, doing what it has been tasked to do, to “serve mankind.”

Within the realm of popular fiction, there are two examples of how governments work to recognize such situations and the deep concern that exists that news organizations tied to terror groups within our own governments are used on a regular basis to bring the world to the brink of war and beyond for profit.

First that comes to mind is “Three Days of the Condor” and the second is the TV series “Rubicon.”

Both are about intelligence groups based in New York City that find patterns. “Rubicon” was cancelled when it aired an episode that depicted a group within the CIA that sabotaged an oil tanker in Galveston Bay in order to manipulate oil markets.

Every other week, an American naval task force steams into the Straits of Hormuz, brushes up to Iranian waters or sends drones into Iranian airspace.

Each of these incidents raises the level of “war threat” and, moreover, each of these incidents incites a carefully orchestrated and extremely easily traceable pattern of investment behavior, which is, by American law, not only a violation of SEC regulations but is minimally treason.

Why is the word “billionaire” so “yesterday?”

When petty banksters and financial scamsters are free to send out carrier battle groups or, as we have already seen, start wars and kill millions, the stakes are higher.

The Ailes/Petraeus tape made clear to many that Murdoch's goals in America have always been nefarious. Photograph: Reuters
So now we have it: what appears to be hard, irrefutable evidence of Rupert Murdoch's ultimate and most audacious attempt – thwarted, thankfully, by circumstance – to hijack America's democratic institutions on a scale equal to his success in kidnapping and corrupting the essential democratic institutions of Great Britain through money, influence and wholesale abuse of the privileges of a free press.

In the American instance, Murdoch's goal seems to have been nothing less than using his media empire – notably Fox News – to stealthily recruit, bankroll and support the presidential candidacy of General David Petraeus in the 2012 election.

Thus in the spring of 2011 – less than 10 weeks before Murdoch's centrality to the hacking and politician-buying scandal enveloping his British newspapers was definitively revealed – Fox News' inventor and president, Roger Ailes, dispatched an emissary to Afghanistan to urge Petraeus to turn down President Obama's expected offer to become CIA director and, instead, run for the Republican nomination for president, with promises of being bankrolled by Murdoch. Ailes himself would resign as president of Fox News and run the campaign, according to the conversation between Petraeus and the emissary, K T McFarland, a Fox News on-air defense "analyst" and former spear carrier for national security principals in three Republican administrations.

All this was revealed in a tape recording of Petraeus's meeting with McFarland obtained by Bob Woodward, whose account of their discussion, accompanied online by audio of the tape, was published in the Washington Post – distressingly, in its style section, and not on page one, where it belonged – and, under the style logo, online on December 3.

Indeed, almost as dismaying as Ailes' and Murdoch's disdain for an independent and truly free and honest press, and as remarkable as the obsequious eagerness of their messenger to convey their extraordinary presidential draft and promise of on-air Fox support to Petraeus, has been the ho-hum response to the story by the American press and the country's political establishment, whether out of fear of Murdoch, Ailes and Fox – or, perhaps, lack of surprise at Murdoch's, Ailes' and Fox's contempt for decent journalistic values or a transparent electoral process.

The tone of the media's reaction was set from the beginning by the Post's own tin-eared treatment of this huge story: relegating it, like any other juicy tidbit of inside-the-beltway media gossip, to the section of the newspaper and its website that focuses on entertainment, gossip, cultural and personality-driven news, instead of the front page.

"Bob had a great scoop, a buzzy media story that made it perfect for Style. It didn't have the broader import that would justify A1," Liz Spayd, the Post's managing editor, told Politico when asked why the story appeared in the style section.

Buzzy media story? Lacking the "broader import" of a front-page story? One cannot imagine such a failure of news judgment among any of Spayd's modern predecessors as managing editors of the Post, especially in the clear light of the next day and with a tape recording – of the highest audio quality – in hand.

"Tell [Ailes] if I ever ran," Petraeus announces on the crystal-clear digital recording and then laughs, "but I won't … but if I ever ran, I'd take him up on his offer. … He said he would quit Fox … and bankroll it."

McFarland clarified the terms: "The big boss is bankrolling it. Roger's going to run it. And the rest of us are going to be your in-house" – thereby confirming what Fox New critics have consistently maintained about the network's faux-news agenda and its built-in ideological bias.

And here let us posit the following: were an emissary of the president of NBC News, or of the editor of the New York Times or the Washington Post ever caught on tape promising what Ailes and Murdoch had apparently suggested and offered here, the hue and cry, especially from Fox News and Republican/Tea Party America, from the Congress to the US Chamber of Commerce to the Heritage Foundation, would be deafening and not be subdued until there was a congressional investigation, and the resignations were in hand of the editor and publisher of the network or newspaper. Or until there had been plausible and convincing evidence that the most important elements of the story were false. And, of course, the story would continue day after day on page one and remain near the top of the evening news for weeks, until every ounce of (justifiable) piety about freedom of the press and unfettered presidential elections had been exhausted.

The tape of Petraeus and McFarland's conversation is an amazing document, a testament to the willingness of Murdoch and the wily genius he hired to create Fox News to run roughshod over the American civic and political landscape without regard to even the traditional niceties or pretenses of journalistic independence and honesty. Like the revelations of the hacking scandal, which established beyond any doubt Murdoch's ability to capture and corrupt the three essential elements of the British civic compact – the press, politicians and police – the Ailes/Petraeus tape makes clear that Murdoch's goals in America have always been just as ambitious, insidious and nefarious.

The digital recording, and the dead-serious conspiratorial conversation it captures so chillingly in tone and substance ("I'm only reporting this back to Roger. And that's our deal," McFarland assured Petraeus as she unfolded the offer) utterly refutes Ailes' disingenuous dismissal of what he and Murdoch were actually attempting: the buying of the presidency.

"It was more of a joke, a wiseass way I have," Ailes would later claim while nonetheless confirming its meaning. "I thought the Republican field [in the primaries] needed to be shaken up and Petraeus might be a good candidate."

The recording deserves to be heard by any open-minded person trying to fathom its meaning to the fullest.

Murdoch and Ailes have erected an incredibly influential media empire that has unrivaled power in British and American culture: rather than judiciously exercising that power or improving reportorial and journalistic standards with their huge resources, they have, more often than not, recklessly pursued an agenda of sensationalism, manufactured controversy, ideological messianism, and political influence-buying while masquerading as exemplars of a free and responsible press. The tape is powerful evidence of their methodology and reach.

The Murdoch story – his corruption of essential democratic institutions on both sides of the Atlantic – is one of the most important and far-reaching political/cultural stories of the past 30 years, an ongoing tale without equal. Like Richard Nixon and his tapes, much attention has been focused on the necessity of finding the smoking gun to confirm what other evidence had already established beyond a doubt: that the elemental instruments of democracy, ie the presidency in Nixon's case, and the privileges of free press in Murdoch's, were grievously misused and abused for their own ends by those entrusted to use great power for the common good.

In Nixon's case, the system worked. His actions were investigated by Congress, the judicial system held that even the president of the United States was not above the law, and he was forced to resign or face certain impeachment and conviction. American and British democracy has not been so fortunate with Murdoch, whose power and corruption went unchecked for a third of a century.

The most important thing we journalists do is make judgments about what is news. Perhaps no story has eluded us on a daily basis (for lack of trying) for so many years as the story of Murdoch's destructive march across our democratic landscape. Only the Guardian vigorously pursued the leads of the hacking story and methodically stuck with it for months and years, never ignoring the underlying context of how Rupert Murdoch conducted his take-no-prisoners business and journalism without regard for the most elemental standards of fairness, accuracy or balance, or even lawful conduct.

When the Guardian's hacking coverage reached critical mass last year, I quoted a former top Murdoch deputy as follows: "This scandal and all its implications could not have happened anywhere else. Only in Murdoch's orbit. The hacking at News of the World was done on an industrial scale. More than anyone, Murdoch invented and established this culture in the newsroom, where you do whatever it takes to get the story, take no prisoners, destroy the competition, and the end will justify the means."

The tape that Bob Woodward obtained, and which the Washington Post ran in the style section, should be the denouement of the Murdoch story on both sides of the Atlantic, making clear that no institution, not even the presidency of the United States, was beyond the object of his subversion. If Murdoch had bankrolled a successful Petraeus presidential campaign and – as his emissary McFarland promised – "the rest of us [at Fox] are going to be your in-house" – Murdoch arguably might have sewn up the institutions of American democracy even more securely than his British tailoring.

Happily, Petraeus was not hungering for the presidency at the moment of the messenger's arrival: the general was contented at the idea of being CIA director, which Ailes was urging him to forgo.

The Winners of the Academy Award and Golden Globe Are … Government Propagandists

Rob Kall points out that the military-industrial complex is the winner of the Golden Globe award:

Homeland won best TV series, best TV actor and actress. It IS a highly entertaining show which actually portrays some of the flaws of the MIIC system

Argo won best movie and best director. It glorifies the CIA and Ben Affleck spoke with the highest praise for the CIA.

And best actress went to Jessica Chastain of Zero Dark Thirty, a movie that has been vilified for propagandizing the use of torture.

***

The Military Industrial Intelligence Complex is playing a more and more pervasive role in our lives. In the next few years we’ll be seeing movies that focus on the use of drone technology in police and spy work in the USA. We’ve already been seeing movies that show how spies can violate every aspect of our privacy– of the most intimate parts of our lives. By making movies and TV series that celebrate these cancerous extensions of the police state Hollywood and the big studios are normalizing the ideas they present us with– lying to the public, routinely creating fraudulent stories as covers for what’s really going on.

***

I was hoping that Zero Dark Thirty would come up without any awards. I was hoping that at least such blatant propaganda promoting the lie that torture works would be repudiated by the Golden Globes. That didn’t happen.

***

The truth is we do live in a time when the police have been massively militarized. We don’t need movies or TV shows that celebrate that militarization. We don’t need entertainment that normalizes the obscene violations of our privacy that the intelligence state is inflicting upon us. We need stories that celebrate people who stand up to this seemingly irrepressible tide that is washing away our freedoms, sucking up all our resources and erasing the last bastions of privacy.

David Walsh notes that the real winner of the 2013 Academy Awards is the CIA:

Zero Dark Thirty, Kathryn Bigelow’s quasi-fascistic glorification of the role played by the CIA in the so-called “war on terror” … was tapped for five awards.

Of course,there is plenty of other war-o-tainment. being peddled by Hollywood.

The military has long had a direct influence on Hollywood. For example, a book published by the University of Texas points out:

The Central Intelligence Agency has been actively engaged in shaping the content of film and television, especially since it established an entertainment industry liaison program in the mid-1990s.

The book laments:

The significant influence that the CIA now wields in Hollywood

Gizmodo reports:

The CIA has a pile of script ideas lying around.

***

The Department of Defense and just about every branch of the military has an entertainment industry liaison similar to the CIA’s.

If you want to make a war film and need a fleet of F-22s, a crowd of Marines, or a Navy aircraft carrier, just call up the Department of Defense’s entertainment media office and they’ll tell you if the Army can spare that M1A1 Abrams tank you’ve always wanted for a day or two of filming.

“The scripts we get are only the writer’s idea of how the Department of Defense operates,” Vince Ogilvie, deputy director of the Defense Department’s entertainment liaison office, told Danger Room. “We make sure the Department and facilities and people are portrayed in the most accurate and positive light possible.”

Hollywood has been working with government organizations to make more credible films for years (for instance, Jerry Bruckheimer and Paramount Pictures worked closely with the Pentagon when filming the 1986 blockbuster “Top Gun”). But the phenomenon is under newfound scrutiny. There was a bit of a kerfuffle recently when some in the press and in Congress speculated about whether the government will give Sony Pictures any pointers while they make a film about the killing of Osama bin Laden.

In a letter to the Defense Department and CIA last month, Rep. Peter King expressed outrage at the Pentagon’s relationship with the film’s director, Kathyrn Bigelow. King claimed that she had already been made privy to sensitive information that could put American lives at risk.

***

Standard procedure is to review the script, make notes on what the Defense Department would like changed, and kick it back to the producer. If the changes are made, the military will provide whatever help they can – declassified information, equipment, personnel, etc. – for a price.

***

Why has the Defense Department recently partnered with 20th Century Fox to make an X-Men/U.S. Army ad or with explosion-enthusiast Michael Bay to make all three Transformers movies? In The Washington Post, David Sirota suggests entertainment like this is “government-subsidized propaganda.”

The Guardian noted in 2001 that this has been happening for a long time:

For the first time in its history, the [CIA] has appointed an official PR liaison with Hollywood: veteran CIA operative Chase Brandon, whose 25-year career was spent defending democracy, it says here, in benighted South American theatres of the cold war.

These days, his brief is to preach a revised CIA gospel to Tinseltown, to overcome the lamentable image the agency acquired during the 1977 Church Congressional Commission on Assassinations, which it has struggled to shake off.

***

Other government agencies like the FBI, the Secret Service and the armed services discovered long ago the benefits of lending their cooperation to movies like Silence of the Lambs, In the Line of Fire and Top Gun.

Coming late to the game, the beleaguered CIA now has to overcome 25 years of suspicion – not to mention a grim history of covert assassinations, secret wars, illegal coups d’état, and the damaging revelations of former agents such as Philip Agee or John Stockwell –if it wants to clean up its image. This may be an uphill struggle, as the agency faces criticism for its failure to predict the events of September 11 – but suddenly, perhaps fortuitously, a slew of movies and TV shows about the CIA will be launched this autumn.

Brandon and the agency have approved eye-opening stuff. The Agency is a new CBS drama, full of best-and-brightest types rolling up their sleeves and attacking problems of national security, West Wing-style. Its first episode depicted a CIA attempt to foil an assassination attempt on Fidel Castro. This might surprise anyone remembering the agency’s attempts in the early 1960s to knock off Fidel with exploding cigars, sub-contracted mobsters and chemicals designed to make his beard fall out – to say nothing of the abortive Bay of Pigs invasion.

***

The company also lent their support to Alias, an action series featuring Jennifer Garner as a grad student-superspy a few degrees away from La Femme Nikita. The Chris Rock-Anthony Hopkins comedy Bad Company traffics in similar comic-strip depictions of the CIA that Brandon was happy to help.

***

Receipt of the CIA’s corporate imprimatur is conditional upon only one thing: a totally sympathetic portrayal of company business.

***

It used to be the case that if a movie explicitly condemned CIA actions – such as Under Fire – the studios could be counted on to bury it.

In fact, the CIA first started working with Hollywood in the 1950s:

The CIA has been working with Hollywood since the 1950s.

***

The CIA first started working with Hollywood to influence foreign audiences. “Their purpose was essentially to shape foreign policy or to win hearts and minds overseas during the cold war,” she says.

The CIA developed a think tank to fight communist ideology, which negotiated the rights to George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” — getting a talking pig on the screen 20 years before “Charlotte’s Web.” Jenkins says the CIA also wanted to promote a certain view of American life, for instance pressing for line changes in 1950s scripts to make black characters more dignified, and white characters more tolerant. This “politically correct” image was intended to promote an attractive image of America to a world picking sides in the Cold War.

Of course, pro-torture productions such as Zero Dark Thirty and the CIA-sponsored tv show 24 are 100% false: the top conservative and liberal interrogation experts say that torture hurts rather than helps national security.

And the CIA’s drone problem creates many more terrorists than it kills.

And the CIA’s other efforts have made us more vulnerable … not safer.

But this is Tinseltown we’re talking about … so no one expects the truth.

Of course, the CIA and other government agencies have long directed the mainstream media as well.

No wonder the mainstream media is always pro-war, and happily trumpets disinformation about supposed enemies to drum up support for new wars. Even after the Iraq WMD propaganda was thoroughly debunked, the old media is at it again

Last month NPR CEO Gary Knell left to take a job at National Geographic, making him the latest in a string of CEOs who left after a short stint running the public radio outlet. On September 13, NPR named a new acting president and CEO: board member Paul G. Haaga.

The NPR press release (9/13/13) states that Haaga's "accomplished career" included a stint as "chairman of the Investment Company Institute"–the powerful lobbying group of the mutual fund industry. As the Los Angeles Times (11/29/03) once reported, "Mutual funds have been mostly shielded from the reforms forced on the financial world–thanks in large part to the efforts of the Investment Company Institute."

NPR also adds that Haaga has ties to right-wing think tanks–he is "a member of the National Council of the American Enterprise Institute" and he sits on "the Board of Overseers of Hoover Institution at Stanford University."

Paul Haaga

Haaga is also a fairly regular contributor to Republican politicians. According to OpenSecrets.org, this year he made a $32,400 donation to the Republican National Committee; in the previous two years, he made contributions of around $30,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee. He's also given four-figure checks to a large number of mostly Republican candidates, including Rep. Paul Ryan, George Allen and Mitch McConnell.

So the new boss–for now–at NPR is a former financial industry lobbyist who is a regular donor to Republican politicians, with ties to two prominent conservative think tanks. When NPR finds a new boss, he'll continue to be a member of NPR's board.

This has probably appeared on this thread before, in case not (and as a reminder if it has):

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
- David Rockefeller, Bilderberg Meeting, June 1991 Baden, Germany

From 'Famous Quotes about Banking Control and the NWO':
(a four-page liist of good NWO/Banking quotes, and of course the bove one on the MSM):
http://www.amtruth.com/NWOquotes2_________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

Roseanne Barr: “MK Ultra Rules In Hollywood” Not long ago, Roseanne made some shocking statements, eluding that Hollywood and the entertainment industry is dominated by MK Ultra For those of you that don’t know, Roseanne Barr is a well known actress, comedian, writer, television producer and director. She has won several awards which include Emmy awards, Golden Globe awards, People’s Choice awards and more. She has been in the industry for over twenty years and has gained much respect from many of her Hollywood colleagues who she is now speaking on behalf of. I just want to make it clear how long she has been inside the industry, and the connections she has to others within it. Industry insiders are feeling the need to share inspirational words and food for thought to the millions of people that pay attention to them as of late. We saw this recently with Ashton Kutcher. Celebrities have a voice that can reach a large sum of people, they can be a threat to corporate interests and the controlling elite and as Roseanne states, many celebrities bite their tongue and live in a culture of fear. Not long ago, Roseanne made some shocking statements, eluding that Hollywood and the entertainment industry is dominated by MK Ultra. MK Ultra was the name for a previously classified research program through the CIA’s scientific intelligence division. It was the CIA’s program of research in behavioral modification and perception manipulation of human beings (1). It was previously known as Operation Paperclip (2). Roseanne is suggesting that Hollywood is a tool used in the manipulation of human consciousness, used as a tool for behavior modification and perception control in human beings. Roseanne Barr Speaks out about MK-Ultra in Hollywood http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-GuRN8QNlk Roseanne Barr, Mark Philips & Cathy O Brian - Oct 31, 2013 MK-Ultra and Project Monarch www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC7Bb4JtKpE Brought to you by: Site: www.ConspiracyCulture.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ConspiracyCultureBookstore Site: www.CanadianAwareness.org Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Canadian-Awareness-Network/185968868114 724 The CIA and Hollywood It’s funny that ancient Druid ‘wizards’ and ‘magicians’ used to make their wands specific for casting spells from the Holly Wood tree. Maybe “Hollywood” is used to cast spells on the masses, because at the very least it can sure seem that way. Everything we do is so systematic, so robotic in nature. We go to school, get a job, have a family and chase materialistic gains only to find out that it is not what our soul truly desires. We are told what to wear, what’s popular, what to buy, what truth is and how life is through television. It keeps us occupied, ignorant and blind to what is really happening on our planet. Roseanne’s public remark that the CIA’s MK Ultra program rules in Hollywood is an educated statement, and not just an opinion. It comes from her own experiences within the industry as well as an awareness of known facts about the CIA and their involvement in Hollywood -all of which also happen to be available to the public. It’s not hard to see how television and mass advertising can be used as mind control, basically shaping the perception of the individual, as well as displaying what each individual should “be” like, what type of life to chase and what it means to be successful. Given Roseanne’s statement, as well as the information we already have in the public domain, it’s safe to say that something fishy is going on in Hollywood. Ask yourself, are your wants really yours? Or have they been programmed into you since birth? Not many people know this, but the CIA has an entire department dedicated to the entertainment industry. It’s run through the CIA’s Entertainment Industry Liaison Office (3), which collaborates in a strictly advisory capacity with filmmakers. The CIA doesn’t just offer guidance to filmmakers, it even offers money. In 1950, the agency bought the rights to George Orwell’s Animal Farm, and then funded the 1954 British animated version of the film. Its involvement had long been rumored, but only in the past decade have those rumors been substantiated. The link between Hollywood and the CIA isn’t something new, and Roseanne isn’t just blurting out information that has no backing behind it. The CIA also had a project called Mockingbird, in which the CIA infiltrated mass media outlets in order to sway public opinion. After leaving The Washington Post in 1977, Carl Bernstein spent six months looking at the relationship of the CIA and the press during the Cold War years. His 25,000 word cover story that was published in Rolling Stone in the late 70′s can be read here. With this article I wanted to present a small amount of information to give you, the readers, some background on these programs within the department of defense. Making the connection between these programs and Hollywood isn’t hard. Using Hollywood as a mind control hub can easily be labelled as a conspiracy to many, but I believe that labeling can only come about when one fails to actually look into it. Hopefully this tidbit of information provides some backing for Roseanne’s claims, along with her experience within the industry. If you want to look more into the CIA’s influence in Hollywood, MK Ultra and Project Mockingbird are a good place to start. Brave souls like Roseanne speaking out is simply helping the masses shed light on these long-existent programs. Individuals within the entertainment industry are simply used as tools for mind control. We are programmed to worship them, praise them and be like them. These “stars” are used as puppets to serve a greater agenda. Let’s not forget that Hollywood (entertainment industry) is owned (shareholders) by the same corporations and financial institutions that own the energy, health and food industry. Institutions like Fidelity Investments, the Vanguard group and the State Street Corporation. They own Disney and the major corporations that govern Hollywood, they also own Big Oil, Big Food and Big Pharma! (4)(5) (6). The connections are endless, and if you do the research, it’s not hard to see. Nothing is really hidden, it’s not a conspiracy. It’s good to see the world waking up everyday. We are recognizing that peace between all is what really makes the most sense. Peace and love is the necessary core to re-creating our reality, awakening to the truth about our planet and who we give our power away to on a daily basis is a step for some people to arrive at a greater conclusion. The truth is, we are required to sustain the current system, therefore we can choose to change it at anytime. Sources: (1)http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_ProjectMKULTR A.pdf (2)http://www.archives.gov/iwg/declassified-records/rg-330-defense-sec retary/ (3)https://www.cia.gov/offices-of-cia/public-affairs/entertainment-ind ustry-liaison (4)http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=dis+Major+Holders (5)http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=xom+Major+Holders (6)http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=MON+Major+Holders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltrahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbirdhttps://www.cia.gov/open/Family%20Jewels.pdfhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5ED63A_hcd0#t=1 9http://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/nov/14/thriller-ridley-scott?fb=o ptOuthttp://intellihub.com/2013/08/21/roseanne-barr-mk-ultra-rules-in-holly wood/http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/roseanne-barr-mk-ultra-mind-cont rol-rules-in-hollywood/http://extraordinaryintelligence.com/roseanne-tells-rt-mk-ultra-mind-c ontrol-rules-in-hollywood/ Trauma Based Mind Control https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10152782320055573.1073741852 .583655572&type=1&l=80462186a6 calmcrash_________________'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'

“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”

And Disneyworld was a programming epicentre for MK Ultra mind controlled slaves from military intelligennnnce, special forces, spies and entertainers who could be harmonically tuned (programmed to 'self-destruct' if they were captured or 'broke program' ('Access Denied - For Reasons of National Security' by Cathy O'Brien and Mark Phillips._________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum